Why am I the only one outraged by the obvious helmet to helmet hit on Bell?

The ball popped out when he hit the ground. Ground can't cause a fumble.

 

The ground didn't cause the fumble, him being knocked out caused him to lose the ball. He came down on his back and the ball had moved to his shoulder by then. Lets be clear here, I am asking how they would have ruled it because he lost possession of the ball as he crossed the goal line. Not looking to argue about it but the it made the immediate whistle look like it was in the Steelers favor.

 

If the ball was "on it's way out" and THEN his helmet came off I would say that would be ruled a fumble but you would have to have a "clear recovery" for possession to be awarded to the stupid rats.

 

What I don't like is the helmet rule was not called on the field, but through replay. In any other situation they don't call a penalty that the refs miss on the field. It should be called on the field and only reviewable if the spot is difficult to determine. Now players in the NFL can be encouraged to go after ball carriers' heads to stop touchdowns, first downs, 2 yard gains, whatever, just go for their head and it might workout for you.

 

Exactly what I thought also how can one stop in midair. The call should have been where he landed...Which was a TD. Cheated us as always

 

I thought for the refs should have given him the TD just for effort.

(Though it was probably for the good of the game that they didn't.)

 

I disagree, Steelers would have had more time and another timeout. Therefore, they could have force the Ravens to punt. Plus, our center may not have been hurt on the next play.

 

You know that if Harrison when played he for us would of made that hit it would of been a penalty.

 

:goodell:

 

No it wouldn't have. There's nothing to call. It wasn't even remotely illegal. Some of you guys need to get off the kick with the refs. They didn't screw us, they called the game based on the written rules. It was clear as day, his helmet came off before the ball crossed the line. You may not like the rule, but the refs got it right.

It's ironic, some of you complain about the refs screwing us yet you want them to completely ignore and rules and give us a TD, which in turn screws Baltimore. Not that I give two craps about Baltimore being screwed, but I don't know how some of you don't see the irony in that.

The reality is we had the chance to tie it up and we didn't get the job done. The refs didn't screw us, we screwed ourselves.

 

The rule is that the play is immediately over once the helmet comes off and you don't get forward progress.

They ended up scoring. It didn't impact the outcome of the game. The Steelers inability to score in the first half and their inability to stop the Ravens from scoring 6 times cost them the game.

 

Even if it didn't impact the game I would say it has certainly impacted the TEAM because wasn't it after that that our linemen started dropping like flies?

 

Not sure I see your point. The correct call was made per the rule so having an impact on the team is kind of irrelevant, isn't it?

 

I'm just saying in the bigger picture if that helmet call wouldn't have happened we might not have lost some guys. But I was even saying if Heath had scored we wouldn't have lost Bell. The point is I agree that the right call was made as far as the letter of the law but it also sort of set off a series of unfortunate events. I'm not completely sold on the fact that if we had converted we would have been able to hold the rats anyway and furthermore we wouldn't have had an o line to protect Ben. Are you saying you don't think it impacts the team for all those linemen to go down? I think it's a huge impact.

 

Not sure I agree it was legal...inside the tackles I thought was legal, but running in the open field seems like that's where the penalties are called. Sure this can be interpretive but I think that blatant leading with the helmet by the defender should be called anywhere on the field in my opinion.

 

Sorry, I wasn't being clear. I meant for the good of the sport - i.e. having refs give TDs on the grounds of effort, which was what I was suggesting.

The call was correct, but infuriatingly so.

 

Absolutely.

And while adjustments to rules can make them ridiculously complex and open to interpretation, in this case could be as simple as - "Once a player's helmet is removed, they are unable to make any further football moves."

 

The complaint about losing guys due to injury is certainly legitimate but to associate it with the play that was called correctly still doesn't make sense to me. It would be like blaming the botched FG attempt on the injuries.

 

Agreed, only problem is either it's enforced exactly as it is now, or it's left to be interpreted by the refs on an individual basis. Then we'll get into each ref interpreting things differently. Does forward progress count even if a player loses his helmet? If so, at what point is the player still playing and not falling forward? In Bell's case it was obvious, but what about the next situation?

It really didn't work out well for us, but I don't ever remember another scenario like this playing out. This is such a rare play that it may never happen again, at least not exactly as it did last night. Taking into consideration how rare it is for something like this to happen, it's almost better to leave the rule as is. That way players know that when a helmet comes off, there is no sense continuing to play, because the play is dead immediately. Forward progress doesn't count so there's no point in continuing with the hit or tackle, nor is there any incentive for a RB to dive forward trying to fool the ref into awarding him forward progress.

 

No I actually blame the botched FG on the botched 2pt conversion. LOL. I know what you mean though. I'm just saying in general if the rule wasn't so extreme to the point of literal milliseconds we might not have lost some guys for going forward. This very play right here makes a compelling argument against extending the season for 2 more games. The more plays you have on the field the more opportunity you get for injuries. If they're gonna make the season longer should they maybe consider making teams have more than 53 man rosters?

 

Well I could see it happening again if there was another play like the one with Whitten where he lost his helmet in the open field with no one in front of him and a clear path to the endzone? If they could have awarded Jones a td on the Tomlin play for having a "clear path" then why couldn't they put in the helmet rule that if a players helmet comes off on the goal line but he has a "clear path" then he still gets the td. It was obvious that he was gonna score and they even called it a score on the field.

 

Exactly what I was thinking at the time.

It changes the element of surprise.

It's at least as likely as not that the Ravens botch the coverage on the 2-pt conversion just like they did on the TD. When we ran the play the first time, they botched the coverage and we scored easy. Then we called that same play for the 2-pt conversion and they covered it. If the ravens see that play for the first time on the 2-pt I think we'd have been looking at a 22-22 ballgame.

 

True. There was no penalty here.

I think the correct viewpoint has to do with "public/media outrage." So far, I haven't seen a peep from anyone about the viciousness of that hit or any outcry against using the helmet as a weapon, regardless of the rules. If AP had gone down on a hit like that (especially if it had been delivered by Ryan Clark), you'd better believe there would be outrage from coast-to-coast. When Harrison hit Josh Cribs on a similar play a few years ago, it added to his "dirty player" reputation.